CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 23 janvier 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }   Communicated on 23 January 2018   FIRST SECTION Application nos. 26581/17 and 31024/17 David ODDONE and Alessandro PECCI against San Marino   The facts and complaints in these applications have been summarised in the Court’s decision, which is available in HUDOC. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Given the first and fourth applicants’ inability to cross-examine L. and G., was their right to a fair trial provided by Article 6 §§ 1 and 3(d) of the Convention infringed (for general principles see Al-Khawaja and Tahery v.   the United Kingdom [GC], nos.   26766/05 and   22228/06, ECHR 2011 as refined in Schatschaschwili v.   Germany [GC], no. 9154/10, §§ 107 and 118, ECHR 2015; see also Lucà v. Italy , no. 33354/96, § 41, ECHR 2001 ‑ II)?